"The situation is painful but necessary"

Prof. David Passig credit: Cadya Levy
Prof. David Passig credit: Cadya Levy

Prof. David Passig says the split in the nation will not be resolved soon but is optimistic that a new middle-ground Israeli identity will be forged in the future.

Prof. David Passig is optimistic. Despite the judicial reform, the split in Israeli society, and the demonstrations. In a hotly debated opinion piece published in "Globes" about a month ago, Passig explained why the time had come to draft a constitution for Israel: "Everyone is afraid of what will happen... I’m actually very happy. We are finally free to deal with the issue left to us by the founding fathers of the State of Israel."

Passig's words preoccupied me until I decided to dig a bit more, with his help. His unique field of activity - futurism - combined with his optimism called for that.

"Neither a Halachic state, nor a secular one"

A large survey by Globes revealed that 46% of Israelis are afraid of civil war. Are we really in such danger?

"I don't think so. History shows that the side that starts a civil war is the side which feels it has lost, or rather has nothing to lose. The opponents of the judicial reform have a higher socioeconomic profile, they naturally have more options for living elsewhere. The masses don’t have these options, and therefore they’re usually the ones who react violently, but we’re not in that space today. There are people who don’t like what is about to happen, but that doesn’t mean that we’re on the verge of civil war."

In general, says Passig, an associate professor at Bar-Ilan University, "For 3,000 years, the Jewish people have felt they are at war with one another. Our discussions are always held at high volume, so the current process is entirely natural to the Jewish character.

"Besides the decibel level at which the Jewish people have constantly conducted their disputes, the current situation was expected because there are highly opposing views regarding the question of what constitutes a Jewish and democratic state. It also rests on a lack of knowledge of what Judaism is and what democracy is. Even before the agreement or disagreement stage - simply lack of knowledge.

"There is an extreme lack of knowledge about Judaism, and this leads to many misconceptions. On the other hand, the judicial reform supporters also don’t know many things; they do not fully understand the term ‘democracy’ or what the values of modern liberalism are. Our founding fathers wanted a Jewish and democratic state, and there is an entire generation that does not know what democracy or Judaism is. Now everything has risen to the surface, and that's excellent. Both sides are going to learn from each other. They won’t do it by choice, but they will do it out of necessity."

In our survey about Judaism and democracy, we saw that the majority were within the median, meaning that people are willing to compromise.

"In my opinion, this represents the fact that there is still a tendency to go with the status quo. This is exactly the same middle-ground I was talking about. Israeli Jews, as many studies show, want a traditional, but not halachic, state. However, they also don’t want a completely secular state. On one hand, the judicial reform supporters believe that the status quo - which is linked to Judaism - has been violated, that they have no voice, and that everything related to Judaism is now perceived as religious coercion. On the other hand, the elites are afraid they are about to lose their liberal-cum-global status, and as a result Israel will become more parochial. That is the source of the current controversy."

"Revival is generally a painful process"

In his "Globes" article, Prof. Passig surprised me, and I assume many others too, with his positive outlook. "I'm optimistic," he explains. "Even though the process of mutual learning will take some time, and even if there will be very painful stages, in all it’s a process of establishing a nation that was scattered, both geographically and ideologically. A process of revival is generally a painful but necessary thing.

"We came to the State of Israel as people who were strangers to one other - with different styles, different traditions, and a diverse definition of Jewishness - in order to build one nation with a cohesive identity. And that is really difficult. So far, we’ve succeeded quite well. We’ve created a uniform military and economic ethos, but the civil ethos that we are working on building will not endure without addressing the in-depth issues. This process will take us another 70 years or so. All in all, we are in a process of renewal that will probably last 150-200 years. This is the acknowledged time-frame for the establishment of new national entities with clear self-determination, a constitution, and equitable laws."

Are you saying this based on the past or based on a forecast for the future?

"Everyone has gut feelings but I look for methodologies, and I'm amazed at people who get sidetracked by passing events. Look, even the US Civil War took place roughly 100 years after the start of the revolution against the British. Before Rabin's murder, I was yelling that this was about to happen here too, and someone would kill a leader. I met with people in the security establishment, they told me it wouldn't happen here because we are different. And I told them we are not. There are always ups and downs in the rise of a national entity, and I look for historical patterns that are likely to repeat themselves."

Prof. Passig even looks to the founding of the state. "When we arrived in the Land of Israel, we did not argue about the essential identity of a Jewish and democratic state. First of all, we built a national homeland so that the fate which characterized the Diaspora communities would not repeat itself. We’re now trying to revert to the various ideological streams that typified the late 19th century, when they organized in advance of the first Zionist Congress. Now, all of these streams are rushing to realize that which was postponed 125 years ago, and is no longer relevant to the State of Israel in the 21st century.

"It is impossible to be completely secular in a Jewish country and it is impossible to be completely religious in a democratic country. So, in my humble opinion, this crisis is the impetus for the creation of a new Israeli profile that will resonate better, and be perceived as more relevant among large segments of the population. It will not be secular or religious according to current definitions, it will have a sense of belonging not only nationally but also culturally, ethnically, and religiously. Most Israelis will be in the middle. This middle-ground will take some time to better define its boundaries, and some time to cultivate prominent, inspired political thinkers and leaders to lead it."

You’re referring to Israeli centrists. Does this explain, for example, Benny Gantz's rise in the polls?

"Everybody wants to speak today to that middle group. First, Bennett and Shaked said they were addressing this group, but that farce just served to make one side, the right, more radical. As I understand it, they’re the ones who elevated Itamar Ben-Gvir. And yes, now also Benny Gantz is trying to speak to this group, and he may be developing nicely politically, but he does not yet have a well-ordered ethos, he does not have an underlying philosophical and conceptual foundation in matters of economy, society, national and religious values.

"Gantz and others want to go for the middle-ground, but there is no middle-ground ethos. From my standpoint in systems research, being the middle is not just being between one side and another. It must be a new conceptual creation."

"A process that will take 20-30 years requires patience"

Still, can you explain why this is all happening now?

"Good question, I still have to think about it. Part of the answer is that in building the state we have reached a high point in our sense of security - militarily, economically, and geopolitically. The level of existential fear has decreased relatively, and therefore we can afford to turn to fighting over essentials.

"The State of Israel has reached a point where it has several issues to resolve, the most urgent and main one in my view is around the Law of Return and the question of ‘Who is a Jew?’ At present, there are severe ramifications: on the one hand, people who aren’t Jewish at all and don’t want to be Jewish, are coming to Israel just because of the benefits. And on the other hand, the international arena is pressuring us with claims that because of this, the State of Israel is racist. We mustn’t underestimate these claims if we want to be accepted into the family of nations, and eradicate the calls for BDS against us. This issue has many layers, from the democratic character of Israeli society to the character of its values."

Meaning, the tensions would have erupted with or without judicial reform?

"Absolutely. In general, I belong to the school of futurist study that believes leaders have almost no influence on historical processes. If Hitler had not been born, would World War II have broken out? I believe so. It is never one person. Usually there is something much greater that takes on human form, and at every point on the timeline in these historical processes there is a certain personage who speaks to the pressures arising from these processes. If that person was not there, another would arise to highlight these processes.

"That's why it doesn't matter, Bibi or no Bibi. The process Israeli society is going through now would have happened in any case, and this is just the beginning. If anyone thinks everything will be over by the next Knesset session - they’re delusional."

And what about a constitution?

"A constitution is the essence of the ethos that is our generation’s lot to formulate and create, that grand idea which clarifies the uniqueness of Israeli nationalism. Therefore, a constitution is the thing that will truly define what it is to be Jewish and democratic. This process will take us 20-30 years to realize, and we must be very tolerant of this process, because it is very difficult but healthy.

"This, given two conditions. First, that there be no physical violence. Second that no group renounce responsibility, and refuse to take part in the process. Usually, the elites tend to say 'Go to hell' if they see things moving in a direction they don't want. And in such situations, they withdraw because they have other options available, for example, leaving to live and work in another country. On the other hand, when the masses see things not moving in the direction they want, they usually become violent because they have no other option available.

"And this is exactly where the politicians come into the picture. They cannot create the ethos needed for drafting a constitution. Their role is to keep the war of wills at low intensity, until the thinkers formulate something worthy of a political compromise. Otherwise, they may only add fuel to the fire."

"A true ideological debate won’t take place at the President’s residence"

Just before Passover, after Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's announcement, negotiations between the parties began, overseen by President Isaac Herzog. Prof. Passig is somewhat skeptical about the way things are going. "We see people specializing in constitutional law who have started the discussion, but I think that a true debate over ethos will not take place at the President’s residence, it is the wrong platform and framework. The right framework is among thinkers from all schools of thought."

How do you explain the dissonance between the intense polarization of Israeli society these days, and the fact that Israel ranks very high in all happiness indicators?

"The happiness figures of the State of Israel are really excellent; we are a small country that developed very quickly. There are advantages in that people know how to appreciate things, and this is reflected in the happiness index. For example, the investment in national infrastructure is relatively low compared to geographically large countries. For example, at relatively low costs, we can pave a road that crosses the entire State of Israel and this enables great mobility for many sectors. A sense of physical mobility drives social mobility, and these increase the feeling of happiness.

"In addition, the country’s small size is a classic platform for preserving the most important unit in human life: the family unit. The family unit gives people security, warmth, and closeness. These usually provide the best experiences in an individual's life. For example, the fact that we can cross the country in a few hours, in any direction, allows us to celebrate holidays, birthdays, and weddings together very easily. Seder night with the family is an example of reinforcing that sense of belonging, which contributes to the feeling of happiness.

"If you live in San Francisco, for example, and your family lives in Iowa, it is a major effort to gather everyone together for one evening in the middle of the week to celebrate Passover. The result is that the sense of belonging fades, and it's only a matter of time before one’s sense of security decreases, because the most important network in human life has fragmented. Israel’s size and the possibility of having closer ties with relatives makes Israelis more stable and content."

Published by Globes, Israel business news - en.globes.co.il - on April 16, 2023.

© Copyright of Globes Publisher Itonut (1983) Ltd., 2023.

Prof. David Passig credit: Cadya Levy
Prof. David Passig credit: Cadya Levy
Twitter Facebook Linkedin RSS Newsletters גלובס Israel Business Conference 2018